ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [registrars] Verisign change to operation of the .com DNS lookup service

  • To: ross@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [registrars] Verisign change to operation of the .com DNS lookup service
  • From: Jim Archer <jarcher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:53:55 -0400
  • Cc: "Robert F. Connelly" <rconnell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Registrar Constituency <registrars@xxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <3F67BE07.5070605@tucows.com>
  • References: <5.2.1.1.2.20030916151536.0a81a8a0@206.16.184.129> <5.2.0.9.0.20030916225141.02c93410@207.228.254.7> <18407718.1063732218@[192.168.1.155]> <BCAAA5D64C837641A9EBB93E2A50894804F9BCBF@ex2k01.corp.register.com> <BCAAA5D64C837641A9EBB93E2A50894804F9BCBF@ex2k01.corp.register.c om> <5.2.1.1.2.20030916160946.051adc50@206.16.184.129> <34886814.1063748698@[192.168.1.155]> <3F67BE07.5070605@tucows.com>
  • Reply-to: Jim Archer <jarcher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Okay then, that works for me.
--On Tuesday, September 16, 2003 9:51 PM -0400 "Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 




I think a little polishing would not hurt.  Ross, is that okay or do you
want it presented as is?


I'd prefer to move it forward as is. I'm a fan of the whereas etc., but
I'd rather move this forward *now* than wait another day for polishing...

We could end up tying this up in "procedure" for longer than we actually
have...let's just move forward as is...(and next time, I'll polish before
I move ;)


--

Regards,


                       -rwr


"Around computers it is difficult to find the correct unit of time to
measure progress. Some cathedrals took a century to complete. Can you
imagine the grandeur and scope of a program that would take as long?"

		- Unknown

Got Blog?




*************************
James W. Archer
CEO
http://www.RegistrationTek.com
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>